Madhya Pradesh High Court
Devki Prasad Verma vs State Of M.P on 25 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19090
1 WP-7524-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND SINGH BAHRAWAT
ON THE 25th OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 7524 of 2012
DEVKI PRASAD VERMA
Versus
STATE OF M.P
Appearance:
Shri S.K.Sharma - learned counsel for the petitioner. .
Shri G.K. Agarwal - learned Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
ORDER
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India by the petitioner seeking following relief(s):
"(i) That, the impugned order dated 11.1.2011 Annex.P-1 may
kindly be quashed declaring the petitioner entitle for all
pensionary benefit.
(ii) That, the whole action of the respondents wherein the order
dated 10.1.2012 and the order dated 30.3.2012 is issued be
declared illegal.
(iii) That, any other relief which this Hon'ble High Court may
deem fit, with cost of the petition."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was
appointed on the post of Revenue Inspector and joined the service on
9.1.1962. He discharged duties with the satisfaction of the authorities
without giving displeasure up to 4.9.1976. It is further submitted that due to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19090
2 WP-7524-2012
health issue, the petitioner, after obtaining due permission, left the
headquarters on 5.9.1976 to get treatment. On being diagnosed with a serious
illness-cancer, the petitioner submitted an application seeking extension of
leave and ultimately remained under ill health until attaining the age of
superannuation on 30.06.1999. Thereafter, the petitioner has received a letter
dated 24.9.2003 by which the case of the petitioner has been forwarded to
respondent No.2 for finalizing the case of petitioner pertaining to pension
and other retiral benefits. It is further submitted that respondent No.4
mentioned the period of absence i.e. 5.9.1976 to 30.9.1999 total 22 years 9
months and 25 days as dies non in Annexure P/2 and forwarded the same to
respondent No.2-Commissioner Land Record. Thereafter, respondent No.2
vide letter dated 25.2.2006 (annexure P/3) forwarded the matter to the
respondent No.1 for taking decision in the case of petitioner as it was an
exceptional case where the long absence can be decided by the respondent
No.1. Thereafter, petitioner submitted the representation dated 22.5.2008
(Annexure P/4) before the concerned authority for finalizing the pension
claim. Thereafter, vide order dated 25.8.2010 the respondent No.2 has
dropped the inquiry pending against the petitioner. Thereafter, respondent
No.2 has passed the impugned order dated 11.1.2011 by which the aforesaid
period of absence from service i.e. 5.9.1976 to 30.9.1999 total 22 years, 9
months and 25 days has been declared "dies non". Thereafter, the pensionary
and other retiral benefits have been sanctioned to the petitioner. It is further
submitted that the impugned order dated 11.01.2011 (Annexure P/1) has
been passed by Respondent No. 2 without holding a departmental inquiry,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19090
3 WP-7524-2012
although 'dies non' is a major punishment. As per the procedure prescribed
under Rule 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control
and Appeal) Rules, 1966, the punishment of 'dies non' cannot be imposed
without conducting a departmental inquiry. It is further submitted that the
respondents themselves closed the departmental inquiry vide order dated
25.08.2010; therefore, once they had closed the inquiry, they could not have
imposed the major punishment of 'dies non' on the petitioner. It is further
submitted that the due to serious disease of the cancer, the petitioner is not in
a position to attend the office and due to such serious disease, the inquiry has
been dropped by the respondents -authorities.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has supported the
impugned order and submitted that on 5.9.1973, the petitioner prayed for one
day leave with permission to leave the headquarters, thereafter, on 6.9.1976
he has given information that he is ill and is unable to the attend the
office. Subsequently, he did not attend the office until his superannuation on
30.06.1999. In this manner, the petitioner remained absent from duty for
approximately 22 years, 9 months, and 25 days. It is further submitted that
Assistant Settlement Officer, Pawai, district Panna given notice to the
petitioner on 31.12.1976 but inspite of that notice, petitioner did not attend
the office. Thereafter, the Settlement Officer, vide Order No. 4886 dated
01.09.1978, again issued a show cause notice to the petitioner, asking why he
is not attending the office. However, despite the issuance of the notice, the
petitioner neither attended the office nor submitted any reply. Consequently,
the Settlement Officer did not decide the petitioner's case with respect to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19090
4 WP-7524-2012
leave period. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the present
petition, the case of petitioner was taken into consideration for pensionary
purposes and pension has been granted. PPO has been issued on 12.10.2013
excluding the period of 'dies-non'. It is further submitted that the petitioner
has not explained before the authority that why he was absent for such a long
period. It is further submitted that 'dies non' is a kind of punishment inflicted
on the government servant for the period of absence without prior sanction
or approval of leave. The requirement of enquiry under Rule 14 is discretion
of the disciplinary authority only after when there is factual dispute. Thus,
the order of penalty was inevitable and therefore, the petition is
misconceived and deserves to be dismissed.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Admittedly, the proceeding the against the petitioner for absent in
the aforesaid period has already been closed by order dated 25.8.2010. The
issue with regard to the fact that any punishment of 'dies non' is a major
penalty and in cases of major penalty is no more res-integra, it is mandatory
to conduct a full-fledged enquiry and only after enquiry, any major
punishment can be imposed. It is also well settled that the order of 'dies non'
is stigmatic in nature because the entire service period of an employee would
be counted as break in service and therefore a full-fledged departmental
enquiry is contemplated in the said situation and merely stating that since
there was no factual dispute, therefore, the departmental enquiry was not
required, cannot be accepted. As per the judgment passed in the matter of Dr.
Nemi Kochar Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. reported in 2007 (III) MPJR 41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19090
5 WP-7524-2012
contended that the order of 'dies non' can only be passed after holding an
enquiry as contemplated under Rule 14 of the Rules of 1966. Thus, the order
dated 11.01.2011 (Annexure P/1) and order dated 10.1.2012 (Annexure P/9)
issued by respondents/concerned authorities are patently illegal and are
totally without jurisdiction.
7. Thus, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the very action of the
respondents is dehors the provisions of service jurisprudence. Such a harsh
order which is based on alleged mis-conduct is stigmatic in nature and cannot
be passed without holding a full-fledged enquiry. The same has been held by
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Dr. Nemi Kochar
(supra) which has been relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
8. In view of the above, the order dated order dated 11.01.2011
(Annexure P/1) and order dated 10.1.2012 (Annexure P/9) cannot be allowed
to remain stand and same are hereby quashed. The Authorities are directed to
reconsider the case for the petitioner for pension and other retiral benefits.
However, the respondent/concerned authority is having liberty to take action
against the petitioner in accordance with law.
9. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of.
(ANAND SINGH BAHRAWAT)
JUDGE
Ahmad
